Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Dismissal and “innocent” are not one and the same

A recent blog commenter (who identified itself as "Whatchoo talkin' '
bout Sidney?") was kind enough to share with me the information that North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper filled out form AOC-CR-307 when disposing of the Duke Lacrosse case. The commenter also told me that the form was signed by a judge. I presume this document was tendered and signed on or around April 11, 2007, the date of the A.G.’s “Innocent Promulgation.” I have not seen the form, but I will take the commenter at his/her word.

The form AOC-CR-307 is a form used by the criminal courts in the state of North Carolina, and is officially titled, “Dismissal Notice of Reinstatement CR-307 – North Carolina.” It is a dismissal form. Since Attorney General Cooper decided to dismiss the case, one acceptable possible outcome by a special prosecutor taking over a criminal case, it stands to reason that he did, in fact, fill out the document. The presiding judge, in signing the document, agreed to grant the prosecutor’s request for dismissal, and make it final. This is what most likely transpired, and such actions seem believable.

What the blog commenter would want viewers to believe, however, is that this document is one that justifies a declaration of innocence. That the judge, by signing the document, agrees with any text within the document that may recklessly state that the Duke Lacrosse defendants are “innocent” and that “no attack occurred.” Attorney General Cooper, or one of his deputy assistant attorney generals may write whatever they want within the document, but at the end of the day, it is merely a form to dismiss the case. It is not a form to declare a verdict or to declare “innocence.” Because of the blog commenter’s bias, he wants to interpret the dismissal form as being an innocent verdict by the judge who signed off on the document. Like Cooper’s promulgation of innocent, this reasoning is an example of overreaching by the blog commenter.

I have not seen the dismissal form used in the Duke Lacrosse case by the Attorney General’s Office, and if the blog commenter has an address where I could find the document, I would be very appreciative. And I appreciate the commenter bringing this form to my attention.

Now, I have no problem with Attorney General Cooper dismissing the case against the Duke Lacrosse defendants (although I doubt that such an act was justifiable having not seen the evidence). He acted appropriately as a special prosecutor in determining whether or not to proceed with prosecuting the case, or whether or not to drop the charges and dismiss the case. However, to proclaim “innocence” or “guilt” was not within his mandate as special prosecutor to the case. What I find appalling is that the media gave Mr. Cooper’s “Innocent Promulgation of April 11, 2007” credibility instead of challenging it. Again, by doing so, the media misled the public who believed it, and insulted the intelligence of those who know better. Likewise, the blog commenter, with respect to form AOC-CR-307, is misleading readers who believe him/her, and is insulting the intelligence of those of us who know better. For us, the Jedi mind-tricks do not work.

17 comments:

unbekannte said...

Sidney Harr de Harr Harr:

You have not seen the evidence, but you declare that decent(HA) honorable(HA HA) distinguished(HA HA HA) exemplary(HA HA HA HA) minister of[he doesn't know the meaning of the word] justice(HA HA HA HA HA) nifong's case had merit. You declare the lacrosse players guilty.

Can we say inconsistent, boys and girls?

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney? said...

Sidney, my reply to you was in direct response to your erroneous claim [the NC AG's] "declaration of "innocent" has no more validity or legal weight than if I {Sidney] were to make such a proclamation."

Again, he forms were accepted by the Judge, and are a part of the Court record.

So, yes, the declaration of innocence, has both validity and legal weight.

Per Sidney - Now, I have no problem with Attorney General Cooper dismissing the case against the Duke Lacrosse defendants (although I doubt that such an act was justifiable having not seen the evidence).

Make up your mind, Sidney - do you have no problem with the AG dismissing the case, or not? What evidence do you think you have not seen?

JSwift said...

Now, I have no problem with Attorney General Cooper dismissing the case against the Duke Lacrosse defendants (although I doubt that such an act was justifiable having not seen the evidence).

Let me make sure I understand. You admit that you have “not seen the evidence” and thus concede that you have insufficient information on which to base a reasoned conclusion. Nevertheless, you feel competent to “doubt” all of those—including Mike Nifong—who have “seen the evidence” and concluded that there was “no credible evidence” to support the charges. As you know, a conclusion that there is “no credible evidence” justifies a dismissal.

I suggest that you retract the parenthetical. Otherwise many of your readers may conclude that you are “insulting the intelligence of those of us who know better.”

Merry Christmas.

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney? said...

JSwift -As you know, a conclusion that there is “no credible evidence” justifies a dismissal.

And when, as in this case, there is “no credible evidence” that an attack even occurred, it justifies, nay, demands, a declaration of innocence.

So that's what happened.

Justice58 said...

Ha Ha Ha

If you honestly thought those thugs were innocent, why are you yet defending them 3 years after Roy Cooper's proclamtion?

After 3 years?! Please!

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney? said...

bug-eyed cynthia mckinney wannabe - If you honestly thought those thugs were innocent, why are you yet defending them 3 years after Roy Cooper's proclamtion?

Why? Because racists like yourself are still disparaging the exonerated players, and claiming that 'something happened'.

Justice58 said...

Why? Because racists like yourself are still disparaging the exonerated players, and claiming that 'something happened'.




Listen you nasty pig who upholds wrongness--Ms Mangum stated during her press conference that she was still claiming a sexual assault happened!

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3800813/

Justice58 said...

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney/Yankenstein/Ready4Freddy


Just stop with the d^^n games! You are nothing but a spineless white trash coward. Ms Mangum was ignored because she was a poor black woman who dared to file a complaint against rich spoiled scum bags!

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney? said...

bug-eyed backwoods cynthia mckinney wannabe - Ms Mangum stated during her press conference that she was still claiming a sexual assault happened!

Good point, 'Precious' was still lying about it a year ago last Fall.

Yet another reason to continue defend the players against hers, and your, scurrilous accusations.

Do you have any idea what the Louvre of DNA is up to now? Her depositions in the civil cases will be comedy gold.

Anonymous said...

@ Justice 58:
When Father Christmas greets you with his traditional cry of Ho! Ho! Ho!, you gotta know he is talking about your profession!

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney? said...

bug-eyed backwoods welfare queen cynthia mckinney wannabe - Ms Mangum was ignored because she was a poor black woman who dared to file a complaint...

Ignored? Not by the press, Duke, DPD, or Nifong. All of the aforementioned made it all possible for her lies to have an effect. Plus she lived for free on the taxpayers' dime for almost a year.

DeHall said...

Dr. Harr -- "Whatchoo talkin' 'bout Sidney?" posted a link to the dismissal forms in a comment on the "NBC-17 News and all media need to stop misleading and insulting the public" post. You should have read them before writing this.

Nifong Supporter said...

To DEHall:

I did read the comment by "Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sidney?" and I did pull up the form. What I asked for was to see the form that was filled out by the Attorney General in the Duke Lacrosse case. Not a blank form. If he can give me an address to that, I would appreciate it.

Nifong Supporter said...

To DEHall:

I went back to comments and did find the link. I wrote the previous comment before I read your comment about the actual link. Reading comments from articles days after they are posted is not always done, unless I notice that new comments have been made.

Thanks for the link "Whatchoo", and thanks for telling me that he had added the comment containing the link. I will study it.

unbekannte said...

Biased prejudiced racist bigot fanatic know nothing megalomaniac injustice58:

The question YOU should be answering, saccharine, is why do you continue to attack them after the Attorney General concluded there was no evidence any crime had occurred.

And, again, if cgm was raped, why is she reluctant to go to civil court and prove her accusations? Why are you reluctant to present evidence to prove your conclusions?

unbekannte said...

Biased prejudiced racist bigot fanatic know nothing megalomaniac injustice58:

From the earliest events on this false rape case, the lacrosse players were asserting they were innocent. The evidence in the case supports them, not cgm. So what other reason do you have to believe cgm, cyclamate, other than a racist hatred of the accused because of the color of their skin.

I ask yet again, why is cgm so reluctant to go to civil court and prove her allegations?

unbekannte said...

Whatchoo talkin' about...

Permit me to make a little correction about your post about who was paying attention to cgm.

If you recall, decent(HA) honest(HA HA) distinguished(HA HA HA) exemplary(HA HA HA HA) minister of[he never learned the meaning of]justice(HA HA HA HA HA) mike nifong never interviewed cgm until 9 months into the case. Maybe biased prejudiced racist bigot fanatic megalomaniac know nothing injustice58 was referring to nifong when she claimed people ignored cgm.
:-)